The 25th Amendment is commonly cited as a tool for removing from office, at least temporarily, a president “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” It was proposed and ratified in the 1960’s after Lyndon Johnson became president following the assassination of President Kennedy. Johnson served out the remainder of Kennedy’s term without a second in command., and the 25th spelled out a remedy for that going forward. But its main claim to fame is another provision, the one regarding what is to happen if a living president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

And therein lies the trouble. The amendment is clear and specific about how a vice presidential vacancy is filled: “…the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress,” it says. But it’s terribly squishy on the more challenging question of dealing with a president “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

Section 4​In Section 4 of the amendment the drafters offered two ways such inability may trigger the president’s removal:

The president him/herself may notify the two houses of Congress that he/she is unable to discharge the powers and duties of presidential office OR

(…here’s where it gets dicey…) The vice president and a majority of the heads of major executive departments or “of such other body as Congress may by law provide” may transmit to both houses of Congress a written declaration that the president is unable to discharge the “powers and duties” of the office.

At that juncture, the vice president would assume the presidency until the elected president is deemed fit to return to office as spelled out later in the amendment.

The FlawsPrior to the Trump era, we apparently didn’t think too much about the practicality of said amendment. But now we do. Such fatal flaws! First, there’s the failure to spell out exactly what is meant by “unable.” The implication is that the inability would be something physical—a stroke, debilitating pain, surgery necessitating anesthesia, a coma, for instance.

The four i’s that afflict the current White House resident—immaturity, ignorance, immorality, irrationality—probably weren’t on the radar of the drafters of the 25th amendment, yet they render the occupant “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office” just as surely as any of the physical complaints. In the ‘60’s, it was a given that any president would be a fully formed adult.

Early in the Trump presidency, some mental health professionals publicly offered their opinions on Trump’s mental health and were roundly criticized for diagnosing someone they had not examined. As a family therapist, I often wished I could see my clients out in their world in action. What we see every day as Trump moves through his world provides more empirical evidence for a diagnosis than a dozen typical therapy sessions. We should have listened.

The second major flaw in the amendment is identifying the “principal officers of the executive departments” (State, Justice, Defense, for instance) as the first responders, so to speak, who could be counted on to take action in the event of presidential inability to perform. Again, a flawed assumption. Those officers, after all, are appointed by the president and, in our current situation, serve at the pleasure of the president in an organization hallmarked by chaos, cronyism, and cruelty. With a few notable exceptions, they are sycophants, apparently without conscience or free will.

We’d like to think this can’t happen again. Many of us thought it couldn’t happen the first time. The 25th amendment won’t save us. This election year, we need to get it right.

]]>Thu, 30 Apr 2020 18:20:02 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/return-to-normal-life-noI’m more than ready to return to the “good old days” when I thought nothing of meeting friends for lunch at our favorite eatery or playing pickleball at the local courts or running to the market for a few items in the middle of the day. However, I find myself mysteriously apprehensive about the prospect of resuming what we’ve come to call normal life.

It isn’t the “normal life” as described above that gives me pause. It’s what has passed for normal life on the political scene.

“Never let a crisis go to waste,” we’ve been told at various junctures. If ever there was a time to heed this, it is now. My apprehension grows out of a concern that we’ll allow this, the quintessential crisis of our time, to eventually “resolve” without addressing the deep flaws it has made so glaringly apparent. Such things as …

A health insurance system heavily dependent on employers—at a time when large numbers will be unemployed

An economic system in which labor unions have been eviscerated, leaving individual workers relatively powerless and often resulting in stagnating wages and benefits while income inequality, aided by welfare for the wealthy, takes on a life of its own

Growing homelessness, drug addiction, underemployment, and astonishingly low minimum wages at both state and federal levels

A presidential electoral system that too frequently lifts into office candidates who fail to win the popular vote and currently has brought us the most unqualified and inept president in history

Lack of effective campaign spending limits in our post-Citizens United world which often turns legislators into tools of big-money contributors at the expense of the voters who sent them to Washington and perpetuates all of the above

And those don’t even begin to cover the immense challenges of climate change which threatens to make the planet uninhabitable and the need for upgraded, new and improved infrastructure in the areas of mass transit, broadband, highways, and schools. The list goes on.

A year ago, we (I, anyway) couldn’t have imagined a scenario like the one we’re living through. The fact that we have a disorganized, uneducated leader exacerbates the situation, but this would have been difficult in any event. We’ve ignored for years all the early warning signs that we must address the many challenges we face. Now we have a global pandemic that has lit up our flaws like a klieg light. The emperor truly has no clothes and we have truly ignored the rot in Washington that has left many among us behind in so many ways. If this doesn’t get our attention and produce action to address deep and abiding injustice, I don’t know what will. ]]>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 03:45:33 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/andrew-cuomo-and-the-art-of-leadershipEvery day for the past few days, Andrew Cuomo, governor of the besieged state of New York, has been conducting a master class in the art of leadership in a crisis. The man who most desperately needs such instruction, unfortunately, doesn’t attend. He’s too busy conducting sessions of the “how not to do it” variety in the White House. I imagine most of you have seen at least snippets of the latter, but you may have missed Gov. Cuomo. If so, click here to see a sample.

The difference between the two is striking—in tone, content, and delivery. Cuomo sits at a table, aides seated at a safe distance on either side. Trump stands at a podium, aides crowded shoulder to shoulder behind him. Those visuals alone tell you a lot about the level of respect each gives his assistants in these perilous times.

Cuomo speaks calmly, with assurance, looking at the reporters, gesturing on occasion. He’s informative and articulate. He uses no notes, but prepared highlights of his main points appear on a screen as he speaks. He exudes genuine concern and believes in what he’s saying. He understands the human condition and shares personal stories. Discussing families in distress, he talks about his experience when his daughter was in isolation and says three-word sentences can make a difference: “I love you. I miss you. I need you.”

He inspires confidence, even as he announces a new level of restriction for the residents of his state. Sensitive to words, he calls his plan New York State on PAUSE: Policies that Assure Uniform Safety for Everyone. “Shelter in Place” scares people, he points out; it’s associated in many people’s minds with active shooter situations or nuclear attacks.

He tells people not to blame anyone county officials, mayors or others of that ilk for the heightened restrictions. “I accept full responsibility,” he declares. When the crisis is over, he wants to be able to say he did everything he could to save lives.

In a word, Gov. Cuomo is presidential.

Our president, quite frankly, is not. He doesn’t take responsibility. He doesn’t inspire confidence. He came late to the game and can’t catch up. He sees everything through the prism of his own self-interest. He insults reporters.

My family—siblings, offspring, and nieces and nephews—are scattered about the country. Like all families at times like this, we worry about each other. One of my sons lives in the heart of Manhattan. I’m glad Gov. Cuomo is the guy in charge in that state.]]>Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:25:05 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/grist-for-the-dems-campaign-adsNo matter who the Democratic nominee is, Trump is obligingly providing all the raw material the party will need for the inevitable parade of attack ads.

He waffles wildly. Regarding the coronavirus, for instance …

On Jan. 22, he said, “It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.”

Feb. 26 … “We’re going to be pretty soon at only five people. And we could be at just one or two people over the next short period of time. So we’ve had very good luck.”

Feb. 27 … He referred to the coronavirus as a “Democrat hoax” and said “It’s going to disappear. One day—it’s like a miracle—it will disappear.”

On Mar. 7, asked about the possibility that the virus would spread to D.C., he responded, “No, I’m not concerned at all. No, I’m not. No, we’ve done a great job.”

Mar. 16 … “it could be right in that period of time [this summer] where it, I say, wash—it washes through.”

And Mar. 18 … “This is a pandemic. I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic.”

Oh my! Trump lives in his own reality, untethered from Planet Earth and us earthbound earthlings hindered by our old-fashioned commitment to empiricism.

Either that—or he lies. Take your pick.

Then there’s the boasting. Childlike, he hasn’t yet figured out the sun doesn’t rise and set with him. The universe has other business to attend to. I’m waiting for the day when the long-suffering press corps (how much of this can they take?) rises up, holding signs above their heads, saying, “THIS ISN’T ABOUT YOU!”

But that’s a topic for another time.]]>Mon, 09 Mar 2020 22:58:46 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/will-the-democrats-get-what-they-dont-wantThe Democratic Party is fast becoming the poster child for the Alfred Adler theory that “neurotic safeguarding always gets you what you don’t want.” Those may not have been Adler’s exact words (he was, after all, Austrian, a psychiatrist in the late 19th-early 20th century), but I’m afraid it may be an accurate diagnosis of the Dems’ dilemma.

I’m hard-pressed to understand the swift winnowing of an excitingly diverse roster of candidates to a slate of two old, straight, white-guy pols. (I can say that because I’m old myself--and there are several old white guys among my favorite people.) There were many other entries in this race, and while both Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are experienced and qualified, this feels like recycling when what we need a fresh new product.

Think back: In the 2016 election, when many voters longed for a disrupter, someone who would tackle rampant income inequality, unaffordable health care, wage stagnation, and unbridled corporate greed, the Dems decided to run a moneyed candidate with long, deep ties to corporate powerhouses and super PACs, one who struggled to connect with voters on a personal level and who proposed little in the way of novel solutions to deep-seated problems. Yes, that candidate was Hillary Clinton, and perhaps the Dems thought selecting a woman made that a bold choice, but it didn’t.

Back then, their other viable option was the aforementioned Mr. Sanders. Like Clinton, he was far from warm and fuzzy. Unlike Clinton, he proclaimed himself a socialist (not the smartest thing he’s ever done) and ran to the left of almost everybody. But he did have ideas about addressing rampant income inequality, unaffordable health care, wage stagnation, and unbridled corporate greed. The Dems rejected him.

Fast forward to 2020. This year … this year, we thought, would be different. In addition to Joe and Bernie, the Dems were offered a field of diverse candidates, including one who not only proposed fresh solutions to persistent problems—and had plans for carrying them out—but who also had what often seemed to be a nearly-sacrificial personal touch. How many little girls did she engage in the “pinky swear” to let them know they could be anything they chose? How many hours did she stay after rallies so everyone who wanted one could get a “selfie?” How many personal stories did she listen to on cold Midwestern nights?

Assertive, caring, smart, inspiring, Elizabeth Warren is the whole package. So why, on Super Tuesday, was she pushed out of contention by voters who swung to the two males now left in the race? Were they so traumatized by the disaster of 2016 that they believed no woman could win against our gender’s arch nemesis Trump? Could they not see the enormous difference between the two women in question?

Maybe. But this seems like the coward’s way out. It seems like neurotic safeguarding which—remember—always gets you what you don’t want. I hope I’m wrong.

Alas, as you’ve probably already noticed, there is no perfect Democratic candidate for the highest office in the land. Unfortunately, the early departures of qualified contenders, the late entry of moneyed wannabes, and a series of heated debates peopled by overwhelmed moderators and a shifting clutch of candidates haven’t made our job as voters any easier.

It’s been almost as chaotic as the Trump administration.

How to pick your person? That is the question. For debate watchers, focusing on substance was often difficult, buried as it was beneath the parry and thrust of the players. And then, there was the proverbial complicating elephant in the room: Who is best able to 1) defeat Trump and 2) increase the numbers of Democrats in the House and Senate? One thing the debates did provide was a glimpse into some of the candidates’ telling personal traits which may bear on those questions.

Amy Klobuchar, for instance, has the distinct ability to lower the temperature in the room. With the exception of an occasional dust-up when personally attacked, she calmed the cacophony when she spoke. Her soft-spoken demeanor belies a determined interior. She’s civil, proud of her Midwestern roots, and relates policy to the impact it has on real human lives. Forced to leave the hospital and her struggling newborn who remained there, she told a story every parent can relate to as when discussing the need for health care reform.

Bernie Sanders, in contrast, heated things up. He filled the room. I found myself wondering whether he listens. Much as I like many of the things he stands for, he came across as dogmatic and opinionated. And I can never quite get over the sense that there’s something tone-deaf about a politician who labels himself a “socialist” in a country where that innocuous term scares so many voters who confuse it with Russian-style communism.

Like Sanders, Elizabeth Warren is passionate

​

in her beliefs and consistent in her message though she did some fine tuning in the course of the debates. Like Joe Biden, she has a compelling life story. She’s assertive in exactly the way we’ve come to know and expect since the days she helped create the Consumer Protection Bureau. Like Klobuchar, she has the ability to clarify her policy positions with the down-to-earth examples of the lives of real people.On the debate stage, Joe Biden has been forced out of the roles he’s played so well over the years—comforter at times of horrific violence (who doesn’t remember Sandy Hook?), elder advisor to Barack Obama, extemporaneous speaker par excellence when awarded the Medal of Freedom at the end of his vice presidential term. His debate performances have been, let’s say, “various.” While there’s still a lot of the warm, supportive “Uncle Joe,” there have been been moments of hesitation, though he seemed to hit his stride as the debates rolled on.Then there’s Pete Buttigieg, whom I first “met” in the middle of a sleepless night. Unable to return to my slumbers, I had turned on the TV, which usually sends me right back to Dreamland. Morning Joe was on, and they announced that some guy I’d never heard of would be the next guest. I turned over and prepared to doze off, but that guy was Mayor Pete and soon I was wide awake as he rolled out his proposal for changing the way we constitute the Supreme Court. He was thoughtful, articulate, and informed. I was impressed. And in the debates, he’s been sure-footed, confident, and not at all intimidated by a field of rivals, some of whom are twice his age and infinitely more experienced. ​

As for Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer, I have only one thing to say: Money. I haven’t seen enough of either of them to offer much in the way of comment. However: Money. If we hope to survive as a democracy, one of the many issues we must attend to is campaign finance reform. No-one should be allowed to buy their way into the presidency. We’ve already tried that.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. The godless third-world performance of Trump and the vast majority of his congressional cronies didn’t burst upon the world spontaneously. I’m speaking, of course, about the shameless combo political rally/reality show that passed as a State of the Union address earlier this week. Absurd enough that the raucous right felt compelled to leap to their feet every time their unhinged leader offered up a little red meat (the scene was positively Pavlovian); but when they chanted, “Four more years, four more years,” you could be forgiven if you thought you were watching a scene in a banana republic chamber full of fear.

Then, a couple of days later we had the annual Prayer Breakfast, at which Trump not only revealed his complete disdain for the event, but also his disrespect for believers. What was more astounding? What Trump said? (“ I don’t like people … who say ‘I pray for you’ when you know that is not so”). Or the laughter of the “religious leaders” in attendance as he denigrated those who pray?

Later that day came the “speech” in the East Room of the White House. The East Room: site of bill signings, major announcements, concerts, dances, award ceremonies, and—of course—Abigail Adam’s clotheslines, replete with the family laundry. The room was packed with cabinet members (Bill Barr, ever the toady, sat front row center), Republican congress members, Fox News hosts, and Trump family members, all apparently rapt by Trump’s recital of grievances and stabs at those he dislikes.

It feels like the beginning of the end. Over the years, thanks in part to Supreme Court rulings that have unleashed torrents of money that subvert our democratic process, we’ve come to resemble a third-world country: wealth concentrated in a tiny group at the top, free press denigrated, ownership of the media in the hands of a few, low-wage workers struggling to survive, education starved for funds. The list goes on.

When I’m feeling optimistic, I let myself believe this will lead (sooner, rather than later, I hope) to a realization and a consensus that we must rethink what we’ve become and rebuild a system that works for everyone, not just those at the top. Sound familiar? Unfortunately, this isn’t something that can be accomplished simply by a change of parties in control. That’s a start. But there has been failure on the part of both political parties and at all levels of government—national, state, and local—that have brought us to this pass. Several years ago, as we launched the war on Iraq, a friend said to me, “I just feel like we need to tear this whole thing down and start over.” We didn’t, of course, and now it’s even worse. Money flows up. Problems flow down. Solutions?While we can’t very well “tear this whole thing down,” we can, if our legislators put aside their own self-serving interest and if we all can muster up the bipartisan will, develop sensible taxation, provide the quality education our kids deserve, institute responsible action to avert climate change and restore the environment, develop and put in place a comprehensive medical care system for all, develop 21st century infrastructure in the transportation and cyber arenas, institute a rational, fact-based foreign policy that protects us and supports others in need. If we can muster up the bipartisan will, we could even abolish the distinctly anti-democratic (small “d”) electoral college, institute voting laws that guarantee one person-one vote and establish term limits so that the legislators, who often benefit financially from many of the bills they pass, are restricted in the amount of time they can spend at the public trough.I know that all sounds “pie in the sky.” But isn’t it exactly what we should expect our government to do? Isn’t that their job? Isn’t that what our taxes should buy? ​

]]>Mon, 27 Jan 2020 01:08:08 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/right-mattersThere are bright spots. Few and far between, they burst from the quagmire of our capital and illuminate the landscape like late-night lightning in a thunderstorm.

Adam Schiff, the unassuming congressman from California and chair of the House Intelligence Committee, lit up the political landscape with lightning clarity last week—especially in closing remarks as he wrapped up the House floor managers’ presentations in support of the impeachment of Donald Trump.

On Wednesday, after a day in which the House managers provided detail after detail supporting the charges against Trump, Schiff spoke about the courage of the career diplomats who risked their futures by coming forward to testify. He challenged Republicans to display the same kind of daring.

“Why is it that Col. Vindman, who worked for Fiona Hill, who worked for John Bolton and Dr. Kupperman, why is it that they were willing to stick their necks out and answer lawful subpoenas when their bosses wouldn’t? … I think this is some form of cosmic justice—that this ambassador [Marie Yovanovitch] that was so ruthlessly smeared is now a hero for her courage. There is justice in that. But what really vindicates that leap of faith that she took is if we show the same courage. They risked everything, their careers. And yes, I know what you’re asked to decide may risk yours, too. But if they can show the courage, so can we.”

The following day, Schiff closed his final statement by appealing to listeners’ sense of what is right.

“The American people deserve a president they can count on to put their interest first,” Schiff said. “… if right doesn’t matter … it doesn’t matter how good or bad our advocacy in this trial is. It doesn’t matter how well written the oath of impartiality is. If right doesn’t matter, we’re lost. If truth doesn’t matter, we’re lost. The framers couldn’t protect us from ourselves if right and truth don’t matter.

“And you know that what he [Trump] did was not right. … here right is supposed to matter. It’s what’s made us the greatest nation on earth. No constitution can protect us. Right doesn’t matter anymore and you know you can’t trust this president to do what’s right for this country. You can trust he will do what’s right for Donald Trump. He’ll do it now, he’s done it before, he’ll do it for the next several months, he’ll do it in the election if he’s allowed to. This is why, if you find him guilty, you must find that he must be removed. Because right matters. Right matters and the truth matters. Otherwise we are lost.”

Republicans, are you listening? Are you thinking? Are you taking the long view?

Would the people who raised you be proud?]]>Fri, 20 Dec 2019 17:50:22 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/tis-the-season-to-go-shoppingAnd now, a digression into more mundane matters. Not that there isn't plenty to say, both good and bad, about our political scene, but I'm taking a break. More to come in the New Year.

I’ve never been much of a shopper so when Amazon came along with its “free shipping and returns,” I succumbed to their entreaties to pony up for “Prime” which enabled me to stay home and take advantage of this windfall. But first, let me say my aversion to brick and mortar shopping is no simple phenomenon, its major manifestation involving clothing, particularly pants.

Manufacturers of men’s clothing realized early on that waist measurement and leg length may not correlate in the male body, and they instituted a sensible system

of identifying garments with a set of two measurements (W36/ L32, for instance). Thus, the choices are endless.

Manufacturers of women’s clothing, however, settled for a much sloppier system in which you’ll find clothing labelled either petite, miss, or women. Occasionally, they attempt to tell you the leg length (short, medium, tall), but these are approximations at best, and without an accurate size chart, length is a guess. While I’ve always considered myself an ordinary short person, apparently my shortness is extreme since even “short” is often too long. I know … they probably figure any self-respecting short female can shorten her pants herself. But do we want to? Sexism.

By ordering from Amazon, I can order the same pants in different sizes and colors, have one marathon “trying on” session in the comfort of my own home and return whatever I don’t want. For me, this beats the multiple trips between rack and dressing room with the requisite taking off and putting on of clothing.

Another, more recent cause of my aversion to brick and mortar shopping, however, is that I’m among those multitudes who crowd the coasts, and more people keep coming. Hence, sensible weekday shopping hours are, with luck, 10 AM to 2, and then, perhaps, from 7 PM ‘til closing. Otherwise it’s traffic gridlock and I find no joy in sitting through three traffic light cycles or creeping along a freeway optimistically designed for an average speed of 70 MPH.

I’ve advocated repopulating the hollowed-out center of the country where I grew up and where, now, some folks could work remotely or venture into small business start-ups or other endeavors; but these suggestions are often met with scorn. In the contest between tolerating weather that may range from 0 degrees to 100 and traffic that may range from 0 MPH to 100, traffic wins just about every time.

All that having been said, here’s the trouble with Amazon: Cardboard and plastic. You Amazon shoppers know what I mean. A small unbreakable item arrives in a 12 x 18 inch box filled with some air filled plastic and an item the size of a tube of travel toothpaste. I’ve even had an “Amazon” box arrive containing a perfectly fine cardboard box full of the item ordered and which needed nothing but an address label to get here all by itself.

Clearly there’s room for improvement here—and, from what I understand—in the Amazon workplace as well. Dilemmas. Life is full of them these days.

I’m not sure which is the most astounding: the treasonous cowardice of Congressional Republicans or the ignorance of those who support them. It’s clear that all of them—legislators and supporters alike—have been taken hostage by the most unqualified and ill-prepared president in our history. It’s the Stockholm syndrome on steroids.* How Donald Trump became, in the minds of so many, the savior—or, in his words, “the chosen one”—is an enduring mystery.

There’s plenty of blame to go around for this sad pass, and not all of the blame goes to the Republicans. An unresponsive government breeds discontent, and discontent, unaddressed, breeds desperation. Desperation, it appears, produces a kind of collective insanity.

Girded by ludicrous rulings (Citizens United,** anyone?) handed down by the Supreme Court, the Congress—its members flush with money from corporations and wealthy donors--has been empowered to ignore the needs of the many in favor of satisfying the greed of the few. This has gone on for far too long. We have tax cuts for the already-undertaxed wealthy while infrastructure crumbles, teachers take on extra jobs in order to survive, environmental protections are rolled back, children are locked in cages at our southern border, international affairs are in the hands of the gang that couldn’t shoot straight … and on … and on … and on.

Meanwhile, in the greatest of ironies, many who have gained little in the time of Trump are among those thronging to the crass performance art he calls rallies. It’s free entertainment and as full of fiction as the CBS series, Madam Secretary, which is a lot more educational.While I haven’t given up all hope, I’m discouraged by the ease with which we’re drifting into autocracy (Madeleine Albright warned us***) and the lack of awareness of the electorate. But more than that, I’m disturbed by the irresponsibility of the Republicans in Congress. They could stop this drift in an instant but that would require courage. Instead, we have willful blindness, self-serving gullibility, groveling before a world-class bully. How do they live with themselves? One of the advantages of longevity is the personal memory of events that those less seasoned know of only through history books. I can clearly remember, for instance, the hearings and events leading up to the resignation of Richard Nixon at the behest of his own Republican party. And I remember Gerald Ford, assuming the presidency, announcing, “Our long national nightmare is over.” Compared to the Trump presidency, that “national nightmare” was a child’s bad dream. Where are the heirs of that party now? ​

-------------------*TheStockholm Syndromeis a psychological condition in which hostages identify with their captors and come to see them in a positive light

**In theCitizens Uniteddecision, the Supreme Court ruled that campaign expenditures by corporations and unions are protected under the First (free speech) Amendment and not subject to restriction by the government.

​***Albright, secretary of state during the Clinton administration, warned of a drift towards fascism in the U.S. and other western democracies in her book Fascism: A Warning.

]]>Sun, 20 Oct 2019 13:47:53 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/refugees-in-focus​Rarely does anything astonish me, but a reader recently brought to my attention the poetry of Brian Bilston. I set out to contact him to seek permission to post one of his poems "Refugee" on the Readers Write page. That's when I discovered the poet is a mysterious figure, not named Brian Bilston, whose true identity remains unknown. Hence, getting in touch proved difficult so I print it here as part of my own opinion piece. If he stumbles across it, I hope he'll get in touch.

"Refugee" is meant to be read both from the top line to the bottom and from the bottom line to the top. The message reading up is the perfect antidote to the message reading down. Read it first in the conventional direction.

Refugee​By Brian Bilston

​They have no need of our helpSo do not tell meThese haggard faces could belong to you or IShould life have dealt a different handWe need to see them for who they really areChancers and scroungersLayabouts and loungersWith bombs up their sleevesCut-throats and thievesThey are notWelcome hereWe should make themGo back to where they came fromThey cannotShare our foodShare our homesShare our countriesInstead let us Build a wall to keep them out It is not okay to sayThese are people just like usA place should only belong to those who were born thereDo not be so stupid to think thatThe world can be looked at another way

I haven’t been writing much lately, and for that I blame Trump fatigue. I know there are many other topics I could write about, but Trump’s unrelenting wackiness, his ignorance, his cruelty, his crashing assaults on truth and reason color the universe, and whenever I try to get serious, I think “Why bother?” There are more interesting things to do: books to read, trips to plan, drains to unclog, pickleball to play, and no matter what I say, my words will not bring sanity to Trump or his chumps or the body politic.

Even though we don’t have to share living quarters with him, having Trump in our lives is a lot like living with a headstrong two-year-old. Anyone who has survived that experience as a parent knows that part of what gets you through it is knowing that this, too, shall pass. We look around and see that the universe is populated by people who once must have been two years old, but who now have recovered and no longer believe that a rip-roaring temper tantrum is the best means to an end and have some understanding of the difference between truth and falsehood and, in fact, have learned all manner of behavior appropriate to real life. Close observation of many children over many years has led me to believe that this transformation begins, in fact, soon after the child emerges from the terrible two’s. Clearly, Trump has missed his chance.

That’s the thing about Trump, the thing that makes life with him so difficult: He’s in his eighth decade; we know it will never get better. And here’s another thing: We may not have to live with Trump (thank you, universe) but he has the ability to show up in our living rooms ... and family rooms ... and (heaven help us) our bedrooms.

Mercifully, TV’s have channel changers and mute buttons and off switches and—depending on your provider, I guess—music channels for every taste, some of them featuring soothing New Age music to counteract the chaos.

Gratuitous cruelty to children, indifference to those impacted by horrific natural and man’made disasters, ignorance of history and norms of governance and simple human decency: these are unacceptable in a president of the United States. Add to that the total self-absorption, and the past few days have been ... what? Tragedy? Comedy? The theater of the absurd? While the Bahamians struggle with the devastation of their islands and catastrophic loss of life, Trump does what? ... Takes a Sharpie to a weather map and spends days defending his erroneous statement that Hurricane Dorian would impact Alabama! Over and over and over again.And all the while, in the Bahamas, hundreds are missing and presumed dead; thousands are homeless, injured, hungry, thirsty. The Sharpie king doesn’t seem to notice. After all, Mar-a-Lago, it seems, is spared. Does anything else matter?​What are we looking at here? Psychosis? Dementia? Delusions? Regression? We ignore it at our peril. Donald Trump is a dangerous man, dangerous to civil liberties, to our economy, to a rational world order, to the health and safety of children, to our democracy and our entire way of life. He has been brought to us and propped in place by the most pusillanimous posse of politicians our electoral system has ever produced. Stay tuned. ​

]]>Tue, 06 Aug 2019 02:44:26 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/a-warning-for-the-time-of-trump-_______________________________________________________________Shortly after World War II, a German Lutheran pastor, Martin Niemoller, wrote what became an oft-quoted and oft-revised prose poem. It crystallized the role we all play in our own fate and the fate of others. Being very adaptable, it has been through many iterations at the hands of sundry writers. In the original English-language form, the poem referred to the Nazis using a simple pattern: “First they came for …” as in “First they came for the socialists … “

As we know, “they” took their victims away, incarcerated them and murdered millions. We tend to think of the perpetrators of the assault as parts of the official Nazi apparatus, but as Nazism grew, fearful neighbors turned on each other in order to curry favor with officialdom. How about our wildly proliferating mass shooters? Do they, in their derangement, believe they are currying favor with the hater-in-chief?

Will some dystopian future bring us a similar fate? Herewith a warning.

A Warning for the Time of Trump

First they went after the African AmericansAnd I did not speak outBecause I was not African American

Then they went after the Latinos And I did not speak out Because I was not Latino

Then they went after the MuslimsAnd I did not speak outBecause I was not a Muslim

Then they went after the immigrantsAnd I did not speak outBecause I was not an immigrant

Then they went after the poorAnd I did not speak outBecause I was not poor

Then they went after those who were lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queerAnd I did not speak outBecause I was not lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer

Then they went after the JewsAnd I did not speak outBecause I was not a Jew

Then they went after the women of reproductive ageAnd I did not speak outBecause I was not a woman of reproductive age

Then they went after the writersAnd I could not speak out …

Because then they came after me …

]]>Sat, 27 Jul 2019 16:21:49 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/dabbling-in-swedens-affairsWatching the news, I hear reports that Trump is criticizing Sweden for charging a rapper named A$AP Rocky with assault after an altercation on the streets of Stockholm. He claims concern that Sweden (Sweden!) is letting the African-American community down. Sweden?Rocky, it turns out, has been incarcerated since the fracas, which occurred about three weeks ago, and the commentators seemed puzzled about why Trump, the grand incarcerator, is speaking up now.

Huh???

Think, people! In the aftermath of the Mueller hearings, the pundit chatter hasn't been as devastating as we might have expected, but it hasn't been all sweetness and light either. Distraction, deflection, the glow of global attention: Trump's strategy doesn't change much from one day to the next. And his finger-pointing (not to mention projection) knows no bounds.

Anyway ... I understand Trump spoke to the Swedish prime minister and offered to guarantee Rocky's bail if Sweden would release him. And with Trump's (claimed) pile of money and his alleged ability to honor such a financial commitment, why not accept the ... Oops! Never mind! The Swedes probably have their reasons. (They may have heard about his penchant for stiffing contractors, making false claims, lying. ... You know how it is.)

Aside from all that, there are other relevant facts: Sweden's constitution bars the prime minister from interfering in pending legal cases; foreign visitors regarded as flight risks are routinely held in jail until trial, and there is no such thing as bail in that country. It might be wise to check these things out before you put your foot in your mouth. (Now, there's a visual for you.)

And why is there no such thing as bail in Sweden? Well, according to the secretary-general of the Swedish Bar Association, Ann Romberg, it's because a bail system would give wealthier people an advantage. "We believe it has to be the same rules for everyone," she says.

A foreign concept in the USA these days.

Can't you just imagine how Trump would respond if another nation suggested it behooved us to release one of their countrymen jailed on a similar charge?

I hope Mike Pence's children have never been left solely in his care. After touring two Border Patrol facilities recently, he assured the press that personnel there were "providing care that every American would be proud of." Really? Have you met any of those proud Americans? I haven't. Have you seen any of the relatively few photos taken inside those facilities? I have.

But what can we expect of a government that thinks a "mylar emergency blanket" (one per inmate) is sufficient bedding in a pinch for man, woman or child on a cold concrete floor in a windowless cage? Imagine yourself there after a days-long trek through unpredictable peril. Imagine that windowless enclosure, the always-on glare of overhead lights, the grit on your unwashed body, the stench of others, the hunger, the fear, the uncertainty. Imagine not knowing where your children are.

Granted, some facilities are more humane than others, but if the conditions are as rosy as Pence claims, why have legislators not been allowed inside any facility they choose at any time they choose? And when they do go inside, why are cell phones banned?

Now, we have many voices. Here are some unmistakeable messages from a recent demonstration in Oceanside, California. ​

The packaged size of the one "blanket" immigrants are provided in the most crowded and under-supplied facilities. Fortunately, if our government is to be believed, not all "accommodations" are so harsh, but one such facility is one too many.

A demonstrator at a recent protest in Oceanside, California, wears what appears to be a clerical stole. It's actually a "strand" of the packaged mylar blankets.

Donald Trump runs the government the way a blind-folded four-year-old approaches a pinata: disoriented, directionless, flailing.

Ignorant and empty-souled, Trump careens from crisis to crisis, each day a new episode in the melodrama in which he stars as both villain and hollow hero before a crush of complicit journalists.

How many hours of exposure have the cable networks, where so many tune in to check out the news, donated to the occupant of the White House in those south lawn scrums? How much of it is newsworthy? Informed? Accurate? How many of you, like me, have nearly worn out your mute button?

Since so much of what Trump says is untrue and since the commentators will analyze, condense, report what he said ad nauseum, and eventually label it fact or fiction, I no longer waste my time listening to his false claims and rambling ruminations. … Frankly, I can no longer stand the raspy voice, the chin in the air, the crossed arms, the inane posturing, the churlish childishness of it all.

And the trotting out of his prize collection of American sycophants to sing his praises? Oh, my! I’m not sure I have the words. Why not just play a recording of The Hallelujah Chorus? We could all sing along.

Back to those hapless reporters on the south lawn, however. I realize they collect there because it’s the one place they get a glimpse into the tumult behind those pristine white walls. Relishing the chaotic back and forth with reporters he claims to hate, Trump babbles on, and there’s the occasional newsworthy nugget.

But just once, I’d like to see Trump getting the attention he deserves—trudging towards the helicopter, alone—while the news networks, with truly pressing business to cover, train their cameras on three or four steps of Trump’s lonely trudge, then immediately turn their cameras to compelling concerns …

Imagine the scene: Trump trudging away as, voice-over, a commentator says, “Meanwhile, as Trump departs for a golfing weekend at Mar-a-Lago, we take you now to …

Immigrant children, ill-fed, dirty, seeking sleep on cold concrete floors, children who need social workers and nurses and trained child-care personnel, children trying to care for each other in the custody of prison guards, children confused, fearful and, for now, unaware of how this experience will scar them for life

A constipated Congress

Mass shootings

A frayed social safety net

An ill-conceived tax system

A crumbling infrastructure

A compromised voting system

An outdated electoral college that has put a president into office without a majority of the popular vote in two of the last five elections

Persistent attempts in state after state to deny women the right to determine their own futures

Immigrant children, ill-fed, dirty, seeking sleep on cold concrete floors, children who need social workers and nurses and trained child-care personnel, children trying to care for each other in the custody of prison guards, children confused, fearful and, for now, unaware of how this experience will scar them for life (Yes, I know I already said that, but the thought of what they’re enduring infuriates me. I hope it infuriates you, too.)

…and

…and

…and

(Fill in the blanks above.)

We’ve heard it said over and over again: “This is not who we are.”

In that case, who are we? And how would anyone know?

​

The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.​-Thomas Jefferson-

]]>Tue, 11 Jun 2019 02:17:44 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/thoughts-on-a-young-boys-fate-_______________________________________________________________I've been haunted by this photo ever since I first saw it more than two years ago. Lest we forget ... some thoughts

​Courageous empathyTo see this child; to feel what he's feeling;to experience the impulse to rescue.

EmpathyTo see this child and imagine yourself in his place,to experience his reality vicariously ...​his history, his fears, and --now--beyond fear, his numbness.

SympathyTo see this child and feel sorry for him.

IndifferenceTo see this child and feel nothing.

Callous indifferenceTo pass the photo without a second glance.

BrutalityTo deliberately inflict the kind of harm the boy has suffered.

​Cowardly brutalityTo sell weapons to those who will inflict this kind of harmon other innocent children while you turn away.

​And once again, Republicans have ramped up a drive to drag us all back to the heyday of male supremacy.

In the most draconian of recent measures, a couple of states have passed legislation which would outlaw abortion at all stages of pregnancy, even in cases of rape and incest. Other states, while not quite that extreme, have passed laws which would outlaw abortion after detection of a fetal heartbeat, usually about six weeks into pregnancy, at a time when many women don’t yet know they’re pregnant.

Make no mistake: For the politically powerful in the anti-choice camp (and it is anti-choice, not pro-life as touted), this is all about domination. It’s about giving the government sway over a woman’s body and a woman’s life.

It’s infantilization, ironically at a time when clearly that woman may be making the most adult decision of her life, a decision that will affect her mental and physical health, her economic status, her ability to pursue dreams and ambitions, her relationships, her sense of control. It is arguably the most pivotal decision of her lifetime, and it is hers alone. If she wishes to consult others, that’s her choice, but she deserves privacy in the process.

I realize states are engaging in this lunacy in the hope that one of their cases will land in the Supreme Court where conservative justices will overturn Roe v. Wade. But to what avail? Do they really believe women are going to "go gentle into that good night"? I don't think so.

How dare a state dictate what she’s to do? How dare it demand, as some states have done, that she must submit to a vaginal ultrasound or view a video of the child in utero or be subjected to demeaning pre-abortion counseling against her will? What 's more disempowering than telling a woman she has no authority to make her own decisions in her own way in this most intimate arena of her life?The huge irony in the Republicans’ embrace of anti-choice policy is, first of all, their penchant for calling it “pro-life.” As a party, they’re about as pro-life as a nuclear bomb. They want to repeal the Affordable Care Act, for instance, reduce benefits in Medicare and Medicaid, reduce vital support programs for those living in poverty, and keep the minimum wage at a level which would result in a far-below-poverty annual income of $15,600 per year for a full-time worker. All that is “pro-life?”

​And there’s more: They’ve come very lately to concern about the opioid epidemic. They’ve refused to acknowledge the hazards of climate change. They’ve ignored the fact that student debt rages out of control. They support a president who separated children from their parents, locked them up in cages, and now can’t reunite some of them because they’ve lost track of where they are. Pro-life? I don’t think so.

Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated.​ --Confucius

]]>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 02:47:00 GMThttps://www.voterbeat.com/marjs-blog/dems-what-are-you-thinking-_______________________________________________________________​What are the Democrats thinking? Actually, I think the real question is this: Are the Democrats thinking?

In March, Tom Perez, chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), announced the committee was barring Fox News from hosting or even televising any of the Dems’ debates leading up to next year’s primaries.

At the time, I thought to myself, “Well, that’s stupid.” Where will you find a higher concentration of Trump-leaning voters than in the living rooms where Fox News is standard fare? What better way to reach the millions who’ve followed the Pied Piper down the path towards their own destruction?

Passing up an easy opportunity to introduce the diverse and thoughtful field of Democratic hopefuls (an embarrassment of riches if ever there was one) to people who voted for Trump in the last election is like turning down a million in cash because the bills are a little rumpled.

Recently, you may remember, Bernie Sanders appeared at a Fox News town hall. The questions asked were intelligent and pertinent and gave Sanders ample opportunity to explain where he stands on many vital issues. The audience occasionally cheered Sanders and booed (gently) the two Fox moderators. It was a civil event, as “fair and balanced” as the town halls on any other national network.

Now, more Dems are exploring the possibility of Fox town hall appearances. Even after Sanders garnered nearly twice as many viewers on Fox as he had for an earlier event on CNN, however, Perez has not changed his stance. To paraphrase a well-known meme, nevertheless he persisted.

The Democratic Party made fatal gaffes in the runup to the election of 2016 and the outcome wasn't good. Under current leadership, it seems they may be in danger of shooting themselves in the foot (okay, feet) once again.

Mental health therapists subscribe to various theories to understand and work with their clientele. One established school of thought is based on “family systems,” and a cornerstone of that theory is the belief that the thorny behavior of the “identified patient,” whom all believe to be the source of the family problems, is actually a response to dysfunction within the family as a whole.

As I watched Donald Trump’s reaction to the recent news that Robert Mueller had concluded his investigation into the shenanigans of the Trump administration, it occurred to me that the U.S. currently is just one crushingly dysfunctional family system.

In this paradigm the President (you may have already figured this out) is the identified patient. But it’s complicated.

​There are four main players in this sprawling family: The Congress, the Supreme Court, the President, and We the People, and all of us have contributed to this disarray. Trump isn’t the underlying cause. He’s just the most flagrant and savage symptom.

What roles do the rest of us play?

Let’s start with Congress, the creatures of Article I, the cornerstone of democracy, the representatives of We the People, the makers of laws, the keepers of the coffers. Heady stuff—and demanding of time and attention.

But because of our dysfunctional system—no term limits, ineffectual campaign cash constraints, demands by both parties that members of Congress spend hours every day “dialing (donors) for dollars”—legislators’ focus is too often on winning the next election and too rarely on educating themselves on the issues and making the best decisions they can for the people who sent them there. As a result, beholden to the donors whose largesse they’ve sought, their votes often reflect their devotion to their donors—and themselves.

Right now all the above is baked into the system, but congressional dysfunction is complicated by the fact that one of the major parties (and you know which one it is) has allowed itself to be taken hostage by the most unhinged, juvenile, and cruel president ever to darken the White House doors. Don’t you wonder what happens to those legislators’ self-respect? … What return they’re getting on their “investment” in moral turpitude?

Then there’s the Supreme Court, once considered the ultimate protection from injustice and power run amok. That, of course, was before we discovered there is such a phenomenon as a Supreme Court run amok: Bush v. Gore? Citizens United? District of Columbia v. Heller? Just to name a few. A majority of the court having been appointed by Republicans, this allegedly non-partisan group is a major colluder in our current dysfunction.Of the three major players here (president, Congress, Court) the Supremes are undoubtedly the most securely insulated from outside pressures. This makes their most inexplicable rulings (money is speech; corporations are people, for instance) simply confounding. To whom are they beholden? One wonders. It’s easy to blame all of the above for a political system that operates in chaos, rewards the wealthy with tax breaks, slashes holes in the social safety net, maintains a de facto two-tier system of justice, visits cruelty upon the downtrodden, and practices discrimination against those who are in any way “different.”We can criticize those at the top all we want, but … we put them there. It’s up to us to sort the wheat from the chaff and elect legislators, and a president, who represent not their donors but their constituents. Not an easy task, especially in a country where education is undervalued, teachers are underpaid, test scores are king, and so many are woefully uninformed. We all need to understand the structure and functions of government, be able to separate fact from opinion, think critically, and provide reasoned support for our opinions. How are we doing with that? What do the raucous revelers at Trump’s rambling rants tell us about their readiness to vote?Government is serious business. Voters who prefer a bloviating megalomaniac to the serious candidates now coming forward with new ideas, clear-eyed observations, and humanitarian policy proposals clearly lack the tools needed to cast an intelligent vote. Unless we elect a responsible president and informed, articulate legislators, we’re complicit in the threatened devastation of our democratic (small “d”) way of life. ​